Doug: That's mighty scant data for such a sweeping conclusion. Pretty much hearsay.
Doug What Dan's saying is pretty much a cliche in political science - particularly conservative political science. There are even a couple of books comparing the assimilation of Mexican immigrants in California and Texas, and Texas is usually considered to be much better. The Ford Foundation is usually blamed for this - it is far more active in California and tends to give money to "ethnic" organizations (RAZA is the most often named one). Like almost all organizations, the leaders of ethnic ones are far more extreme in their beliefs than the people they represent - that's why they became interested enough in the organization to get involved in the first place. Hispanic elites in California, for example, strongly opposed the end of bilingual education and any moves to crack down on illegal immigration. Opinion polls convincingly show, however, that the Mexican-American population _as a whole_ is in fact quite strongly in favor of those policies. The ethnic activist groups are far less activist in Texas, however, where the emphasis really does seem to be on creating a unitary culture instead of a bunch of separate ones. On this note the passage of the referendum ending bilingual education (despite my opposition to referendums on general principles) seems to me to be a very hopeful sign for the future of assimilation in California. Gautam
